Hi all,
I came across this sentence today. It was said by a non-native speaker.
I'm not sure if the sentence is grammatically correct or logical. Another non-native speaker even said "become+clause" is good usage in English. I doubt its validity and need native speakers to clarify the matter because I can hardly find related subjects once discussed on the Internet.

It is not impossible, but it is awkward. It is not something a native speaker would normally say if they have time to think about it. A native speaker might say it when struggling to express an idea.

Click to expand...

Not just awkward, but senseless. Since "become" takes a noun or an adjective, a person after saying "become" will try to retrieve a noun or adjective from his mind. I don't think a sober person with no trauma would say "I become that" to express an idea within in their head.

Not just awkward, but senseless. Since "become" takes a noun or an adjective, a person after saying "become" will try to retrieve a noun or adjective from his mind. I don't think a sober person with no trauma would say "I become that" to express an idea within in their head.

Click to expand...

The question was whether it was 'definitely impossible'. Could a native speaker ever come out with this?
According to stevenst, this did in fact happen.

This is a different question from whether it is correct. When speaking on the spur of the moment, people may easily start one sentence, readjust their thought and carry on with a different structure.

The original post could well be an example of that.

Would you say native speakers never utter anything but strict grammatical English?

Maybe stevenst edited his/her post but s/he says that a non-native speaker produced the sentence? I just find "awkward" to be an understatement. And the definition of "possible" I go by here is "correct" (i.e. would a native ever knowingly write or say this?).

For purposes of language discussion, I believe we should draw a distinct line between 'possible' and 'correct'.

I would also maintain a distinct difference between 'what is correct' and 'what a native speaker would knowingly write or say' (otherwise, native speakers would acquire the superhuman privilege that as long as they know what they are saying, they cannot make a mistake).

For purposes of language discussion, I believe we should draw a distinct line between 'possible' and 'correct'.

I would also maintain a distinct difference between 'what is correct' and 'what a native speaker would knowingly write or say' (otherwise, native speakers would acquire the superhuman privilege that as long as they know what they are saying, they cannot make a mistake).

Click to expand...

Oh, I've come to use "correct" here in the sense of descriptive grammar, not prescriptive grammar, so I agree that that distinction should be made (and that "correct" should refer to descriptive grammar unless otherwise defined). That's how I use "possible" too because why ask or say if something is possible if everything is possible? What's the point in that? I just felt that some meaning can usually be teased out of awkward constructions, but with "become that" there is none.

some meaning can usually be teased out of awkward constructions, but with "become that" there is none.

Click to expand...

My impression is that the original poster understood the sentence
'I am slowly becoming that I need to cooperate with others' as meaning:
'I am slowly becoming a person such that I need to cooperate with others'.

My impression is that the original poster understood the sentence
'I am slowly becoming that I need to cooperate with others' as meaning:
'I am slowly becoming a person such that I need to cooperate with others'.

Click to expand...

'I am slowly becoming a person such that I need to cooperate with others' --> Is this a grammatically correct sentence? What does "such that" mean here?

'I am slowly becoming a person such that I need to cooperate with others' --> Is this a grammatically correct sentence? What does "such that" mean here?

Click to expand...

It is grammatically correct. It means the same as:
'I am slowly becoming such a person that I need to cooperate with others'
'Such' means 'of that kind', or 'of that type': in other words, 'a person of the kind that would need to cooperate'.

It is grammatically correct. It means the same as:
'I am slowly becoming such a person that I need to cooperate with others'
'Such' means 'of that kind', or 'of that type': in other words, 'a person of the kind that would need to cooperate'.

Click to expand...

Thanks for your clarification.
Can I say that "such" is the abbreviation of "of that kind/type" ?
Eg. Flower such is my favorite.
People such are easy to get along with.

To use 'such' in these examples, you would say 'Such flowers are my favourites', (I'm not sure I can explain why 'flowers' and 'favourites' have to be plural), and 'Such people are easy to get along with'.

To use 'such' in these examples, you would say 'Such flowers are my favourites', (I'm not sure I can explain why 'flowers' and 'favourites' have to be plural), and 'Such people are easy to get along with'.

The difficulty with this is really that 'such a flower' is a generic expression, whereas a favourite must be a particular one.

'Such a flower could be my favourite' works, because it does not create the same conflict of generic and particular (the favourite has not yet been chosen: but a group has been identified from which it could come).

I hope you do not mean that 'such that' (or 'such as') is incorrect in these cases. It is perfectly good English.
Granted, in ordinary speech, people would normally use the shorter alternatives you have provided.

Unfortunately, the shorter sentences do not illustrate the workings of the word 'such', which was the reason for these examples. They demonstrate that stevenst has correctly understood how to use 'such'.